The Merc hasn't always been terrible over a lap in comparison to the front runners - its race pace that has been miserable all these years. They are still seeing the times fall off more steeply than everyone else on long runs.

The general consensus seems to be that it will be very close and it's very difficult to get good running in in these cold temperatures we are seeing. The start of the season may well be very chaotic having Maldonado win the first race or something while everyone scrabbles to understand what's going on, then eventually we will get a similar pattern to 2013 later on.

Well i'm not going to stretch not looking too bad to winning the WDC [/quote]

Hey why not, Hamilton or Nico for WDC, you heard it here first.[/quote]I want what you're smoking [/quote]They certainly seem to have found something in the Merc.... and if it's holding it's own come mid season then who knows; after all, all the teams will want to cut off development as early as possible to maximise on the 2014 spec.

I'm so going to have to eat those words....[/quote]Well i think if they can get the odd win and some podiums that would be an achievement in itself, certainly a massive step forward to how they finished last season, it would also make a run on the 2014 titles seem a reasonable goal

These tires this year will be the end of Pirelli in F1. Tyre whispering perez is already talking ten stops in Melbourne, and is lamenting the fact that degradation has not been this bad.

I get that the FIA asked for more wear and tear in the tyres, but its the constant change by Pirelli as far as tyre construction is concerned that has bothered me. The 2011 spec tyres were fine....the 2012 spec featured a pathetic narrow working range, and THIS spec just seems to be worse all around.

How can an F1 tyre have ONE lap of good life before it starts to degrade? Hell, the hard tyres can't even push 20 laps!

_________________"A man should choose a friend who is better than himself"

The Merc hasn't always been terrible over a lap in comparison to the front runners - its race pace that has been miserable all these years. They are still seeing the times fall off more steeply than everyone else on long runs.

F1 wanted more pit stops, Pirelli gave them a plan for how they would change the tires to ensure more pit stops, and were given the go ahead to make the new tires accordingly. Why should Pirelli be booted for doing what they were asked for, the way they said they'd do it?

I think the teams are happier with the performance of the tires this year because its much more consistent, and predictable. They may be dropping off more quickly, but they are doing it in a regular pattern, and when the teams make a change to the car, the result is as they intended it to be. Last year, they made a change and the result was not predictable - the behavior of the tires was very inconsistent. Pirelli has solved that problem.

More deg, in a steady pattern, isn't a bad thing for anyone. Firstly its easier to develop a car to slow the deg down if its uniform and regular. Second, it means there will be a variety of strategies that can win races. Many avenues to the same result, depending on your car, your driver, and how good your crew is. By mid season the teams will have figured out how to curb the deg enough to pit when they think they are near, rather than when they've reached the point of no return, and shortly after that they will have developed the cars to keep the tires going long enough to get faster over a stint rather than slower, and pit when its otherwise strategically helpful, not because the tires have quit. Same as last year. Only it should be easier to get to that point this year.

These tires this year will be the end of Pirelli in F1. Tyre whispering perez is already talking ten stops in Melbourne, and is lamenting the fact that degradation has not been this bad.

I get that the FIA asked for more wear and tear in the tyres, but its the constant change by Pirelli as far as tyre construction is concerned that has bothered me. The 2011 spec tyres were fine....the 2012 spec featured a pathetic narrow working range, and THIS spec just seems to be worse all around.

How can an F1 tyre have ONE lap of good life before it starts to degrade? Hell, the hard tyres can't even push 20 laps!

Even Bridgestone had one good lap.

If you did a quali style lap on them it took it out of the tyres if you fluffed the lap to get the max you needed new boots or else your next lap was compromised by the the best being out of the tyres. Pirelli aren't unique in that way by any stretch of the imagination.

This isn't how F1 used to be (flat out racing). Instead, the drivers having to babysit their tyres, which is incredibly silly if you think about it.

With the bridgestones, you had to look after your tyres, but also there was a window where you could push the tyres hard during a stint for several laps.

There have always been limiting factors in F1. Fuel, engine, gearbox, driver fitness. Now its tires. Not any different.

In every era there is a performance limiter, and a set of rules within which you have to find the best way to beat that performance limiter. F1 has decided that making the tires that limiter right now maintains the best balance of keeping development costs within reach for the teams and providing a good show for the fans. I can't think of a better way to do it myself. What else would fit as well into the sport without ruining the competitiveness of the racing and/or the business model?

Not to mention flat out racing is definitely not a guarantee for the quality of the spectacle. And as childish as it sounds, I'd like to watch a nice show. I simply don't find attractive the idea of driver getting stuck behind much slower one and yet there's no chance of him getting past on track.

As long as the tyres are consistent enough in degradation it is good enough.

Tyres have always been susceptible to variation, in both reliability and wear rates (including at different tracks of course). The only difference is that Pirelli have been specifically asked to reduce longevity (and this year, to have increased the width of the operating temperature window, I believe?). The prime and option tyres were introduced to improve racing spectacle and also to give the teams a 'choice' of how they attacked a race, with the added provision of having to run both primes and options in any dry race.I don't see that Pirelli have done anything wrong - even in the first year, the teams were whinging because they couldn't predict the wear rates, etc - but it sure helped the racing - and at the end of the year, the teams were much happier!I'd guess that a large portion of the work during pre-season testing is simply about tyre degredation analysis, with different fuel loads and 'consistent' lap pace, etc. FFS, this is the most crucial info with respect to race strategy and, if we ignore any significant difference in actual race pace (a la RBR scampering away!) it is this race strategy info that mostly affects the final points scored!

I noted Hamiltons stints today were mostly 10-15+ laps, suggesting a large amount of tyre wear type analysis? (probs cos Merc has historically been bad in that way?). I spotted that some stints were started with a fastish lap, followed by gradually slowing laps. Obviously we have no idea, but I can imagine Merc are desperate to know how their tyre wear will be, so I can imagine them putting a good bit of fuel in the car and saying, 'Nail it for a couple of laps, to see what the tyre can do, then settle down to a steady pace to see how long they last' - or words to that effect.....when they are concentrating on car balance and tyre wear interaction, etc.Compare that to Vettel who I noted did fewer lap stints and suggests they were looking more at pace and aero set up/balance etc rather than longer runs? I don't recall the RBR ever being particularly hard on its tyres, so presumably they don't need to worry as much about it? (though, of course, different teams will run vastly different testing programs too!)

Suffice to say that, IMHO, the teams will not be surprised by the tyres again anytime soon and they will be ensuring they have a great database of tyre wear info by mid-season as per recently.

Was impressed with Perez' lap today - ok, it was on softs - but shows that the Mclaren at least has some pace...as has the RB with Vettels fast lap.I'm hoping that both the Lotus and Merc can show some 'equivalent' one lap pace soon - because, if nothing else, having a few equally paced cars will make for a far more interesting season and hopefully some closer racing!

This isn't how F1 used to be (flat out racing). Instead, the drivers having to babysit their tyres, which is incredibly silly if you think about it.

With the bridgestones, you had to look after your tyres, but also there was a window where you could push the tyres hard during a stint for several laps.

There have always been limiting factors in F1. Fuel, engine, gearbox, driver fitness. Now its tires. Not any different.

In every era there is a performance limiter, and a set of rules within which you have to find the best way to beat that performance limiter. F1 has decided that making the tires that limiter right now maintains the best balance of keeping development costs within reach for the teams and providing a good show for the fans. I can't think of a better way to do it myself. What else would fit as well into the sport without ruining the competitiveness of the racing and/or the business model?

To be fair, the gimmicks like DRS were brought in to help aid overtaking (due to the fact that overtaking might be difficult). In 2010, there wasn't much overtaking going on, people said thing's were boring then and hence Pirelli felt the need to go down a different route to bring back action in the races.

I agree also with one of the other posters below my original comment, that the tyres should have consistent degradation. But still, I always enjoy seeing drivers push their cars to the limit, aka kicking up some dust at the exit of a kerb.

This isn't how F1 used to be (flat out racing). Instead, the drivers having to babysit their tyres, which is incredibly silly if you think about it.

With the bridgestones, you had to look after your tyres, but also there was a window where you could push the tyres hard during a stint for several laps.

You have always been able to take out too much of the tyres too soon. In the last no Re-fuelling there was still the flat out and more stops Vs Pacing yourself for less stops argument as there is today. There are two back to back races in '85 poss '86 that perfectly highlight this.

One of the major differences between now and then is previously the teams and drivers could choose any compound they wished. There were no only two brought to a race or a rule that stated that two compounds must be used. So a driver that was hard on tyres could go on harder tyres. Or one team might go

Then there was also the unlimited testing so teams and drivers had much more real time to get a handle on the tyres and find set ups than what is available now. It wasn't unknown for a team to have a test team at another circuit working on setup for the race team during a race weekend.

And lets not forget that a race weekend on it's own had a lot more mileage and time to get the car set up to the tyres PLUS set up changes between Quali and the race and no limits on the amount of tyres over a weekend.

So there are a lot more factors at work causing todays "Problems" than simple bad tyres.

Even during a the re-fuelling days it wasn't all balls out racing if fuel conservation and fewer stops was faster.

Don't like the tires. I go along with the posters that tire management shouldn't be the determining factor in a F1 race.

Watched the daytona 24 hr race where the cars were flat out for most of the race. The lemans 24 hr race last year was almost flat out. Here we have what is supposed to be best of the best and what do we have, tire management. If that's what it takes to have a close race than we shouldn't call it RACING. Just my opinion.

Endurance and sports car racing includes balance of performance, for starters, which is not part of F1. Many men sit in a room and calculate how to slow down one type of car and speed up another. That's as pure as britney spears' singing voice.

And endurance and sports car racing is fuel limited. The strategies are dictated by fuel window (which is also manipulated by the organizers via cell size and flow rate), which means the racing is all about balancing your speed with the economy of your engine. Its no different than balancing your speed with tire life. Tire life is a factor in sports cars as well - you will see not all the teams can triple stint their rubber in the day light hours at LM, for example. Its just less significant in that racing format because safety cars, fuel windows, and driver changes all influence the strategy. I can assure you they still drive to the # on the dash for most of the 24 hrs.

_________________

Last edited by ashley313 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

While Checo talks about surprising tire deg, Kimi says the opposite, “A year ago we had similar problems when cold and no rubber on circuit. I don’t expect similar problems in the races.”

Remember that Checo is Mr. Tire Life. Maybe his McLaren isn't so good for that as his Sauber was.

I was thinking that initially myself but others have similar opinions of the tyre deg. I believe Hulkenberg has noticed it and the same with Seb and Rosberg.

Quote:

Nico Hulkenberg: "We got a lot done, but also had some issues today. I did quite a lot of running, but it was difficult because the tyres degraded quite quickly. In addition, it was not easy for us today to use the full potential of the tyres on a single quick lap. There is definitely room for improvement."

Quote:

Sebastian Vettel: "It's quite tough to keep the tyres alive for many laps."

While Checo talks about surprising tire deg, Kimi says the opposite, “A year ago we had similar problems when cold and no rubber on circuit. I don’t expect similar problems in the races.”

Remember that Checo is Mr. Tire Life. Maybe his McLaren isn't so good for that as his Sauber was.

I was thinking that initially myself but others have similar opinions of the tyre deg. I believe Hulkenberg has noticed it and the same with Seb and Rosberg.

They all say the deg is high, and that it comes quickly and steadily...but most of them also say its part of the conditions, and Checo is the only one I've seen talking about race behavior predictions.

Hulk is saying the team has work to do to maximize their tire performance..isn't that the point of testing, and ultimately, development throughout the season? I see nothing worrying there.

_________________

Last edited by ashley313 on Wed Feb 20, 2013 9:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Endurance and sports car racing includes balance of performance, for starters, which is not part of F1. Many men sit in a room and calculate how to slow down one type of car and speed up another. That's as pure as britney spears' singing voice.

And endurance and sports car racing is fuel limited. The strategies are dictated by fuel window (which is also manipulated by the organizers via cell size and flow rate), which means the racing is all about balancing your speed with the economy of your engine. Its no different than balancing your speed with tire life. Tire life is a factor in sports cars as well - you will see not all the teams can triple stint their rubber in the day light hours at LM, for example. Its just less significant in that racing format because safety cars, fuel windows, and driver changes all influence the strategy. I can assure you they still drive to the # on the dash for most of the 24 hrs.

While Checo talks about surprising tire deg, Kimi says the opposite, “A year ago we had similar problems when cold and no rubber on circuit. I don’t expect similar problems in the races.”

Remember that Checo is Mr. Tire Life. Maybe his McLaren isn't so good for that as his Sauber was.

I was thinking that initially myself but others have similar opinions of the tyre deg. I believe Hulkenberg has noticed it and the same with Seb and Rosberg.

Quote:

Nico Hulkenberg: "We got a lot done, but also had some issues today. I did quite a lot of running, but it was difficult because the tyres degraded quite quickly. In addition, it was not easy for us today to use the full potential of the tyres on a single quick lap. There is definitely room for improvement."

Quote:

Sebastian Vettel: "It's quite tough to keep the tyres alive for many laps."

If the tyres will be as bad as they look now, I can imagine most teams will not take part at qualifying to save tyresThey rather start from behind and have enough tyres than to run out of them during the race

While Checo talks about surprising tire deg, Kimi says the opposite, “A year ago we had similar problems when cold and no rubber on circuit. I don’t expect similar problems in the races.”

Remember that Checo is Mr. Tire Life. Maybe his McLaren isn't so good for that as his Sauber was.

I was thinking that initially myself but others have similar opinions of the tyre deg. I believe Hulkenberg has noticed it and the same with Seb and Rosberg.

Quote:

Nico Hulkenberg: "We got a lot done, but also had some issues today. I did quite a lot of running, but it was difficult because the tyres degraded quite quickly. In addition, it was not easy for us today to use the full potential of the tyres on a single quick lap. There is definitely room for improvement."

Quote:

Sebastian Vettel: "It's quite tough to keep the tyres alive for many laps."

If the tyres will be as bad as they look now, I can imagine most teams will not take part at qualifying to save tyresThey rather start from behind and have enough tyres than to run out of them during the race

We have heard the same thing for the last 2 years an come Melbourne it has usually been fine with 2 stops. What drivers are saying now is no different to waht they were saying in 2011/2012.

Perez has changed teams. He came from Sauber who were exceptionally good at managing tyres and increasing the first stint to get Perez up the order. They did this all season. McLaren was and probably is quicker car with more performance, different engine which probably needs change in driving style. Not to mention it is very cold in Barcelona.I am afraid they are not going to get good tyre data out of these tests. The last day is going to be even colder and will most likely rain a bit and even 3rd test is going to be cold with chances of rain.Tomorrow expect lot of running from teams as it is the only guaranteed (almost ) dry day.

Can anyone who has actually watched the testing session tell me if Hamilton did his fastest lap on hards or mediums? PF1's article says he was on mediums but then notes his result with a "Hard". It would be amazing if he actually did that kind of lap time with hards, which Pirelli says is 0.8s slower than mediums.http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/8512 ... elona-Test

"Hamilton was the busiest man on the track as he completed 121 laps, posting a best time of 1:22.726 on the medium tyres while Alonso was fifth with a 1:23.247."

Can anyone who has actually watched the testing session tell me if Hamilton did his fastest lap on hards or mediums? PF1's article says he was on mediums but then notes his result with a "Hard". It would be amazing if he actually did that kind of lap time with hards, which Pirelli says is 0.8s slower than mediums.http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/8512 ... elona-Test

"Hamilton was the busiest man on the track as he completed 121 laps, posting a best time of 1:22.726 on the medium tyres while Alonso was fifth with a 1:23.247."

Can anyone who has actually watched the testing session tell me if Hamilton did his fastest lap on hards or mediums? PF1's article says he was on mediums but then notes his result with a "Hard". It would be amazing if he actually did that kind of lap time with hards, which Pirelli says is 0.8s slower than mediums.http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/8512 ... elona-Test

"Hamilton was the busiest man on the track as he completed 121 laps, posting a best time of 1:22.726 on the medium tyres while Alonso was fifth with a 1:23.247."

Can anyone who has actually watched the testing session tell me if Hamilton did his fastest lap on hards or mediums? PF1's article says he was on mediums but then notes his result with a "Hard". It would be amazing if he actually did that kind of lap time with hards, which Pirelli says is 0.8s slower than mediums.http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/8512 ... elona-Test

"Hamilton was the busiest man on the track as he completed 121 laps, posting a best time of 1:22.726 on the medium tyres while Alonso was fifth with a 1:23.247."

Forgot to mention...I'm comparing avg time change per lap over long runs in testing, and avg time change per stint, to avg time change per lap and avg time change per stint of 5 drivers across the grid at 3 races from the beginning, middle, and end of 2012.

Obviously there are factors other than tire wear that affect both the testing and race times, so you'll need to consider that when digesting the final deltas when I present them.

I will use 3 runs for each driver from testing, so I won't have all the data until the end of next week.

A tiny snippet from the data from today. Before you try to extrapolate anything from it, please please please think completely about what the numbers mean and remember that there are other influences on the data (like RIC's run was a few laps shorter, and try as I might to find clean, similar runs, there are always outliers, esp in testing format). Looking at averages is also far from precise, its just a handy way to generalize for those who can't or don't need to digest specifics.

Replace that wine with a scotch, the time sheets with schematics and a general systems tech order and that calculator with... Well probably another scotch tbh and that's the exact scene I'm in when troubleshooting an aircraft from home... Good to see some things are universal

Edit; on the actual timing that is a massive difference for RIC, I know testing blah blah. But they must have had significantly less fuel if my reasoning stands? The Toro Rosso isn't exactly a downforce beast, in fact it's probably one of the cleaner cars out there. So you would expect (or I would anyway) that with less downforce through corners you would get much more tyre deg under the same conditions as the RB or others, but the numbers say otherwise. Only reasoning I can point to is far less weight in the car to start with. Or harder tyres? I haven't been keeping the closest eye on testing, it's hard in aus.

While Checo talks about surprising tire deg, Kimi says the opposite, “A year ago we had similar problems when cold and no rubber on circuit. I don’t expect similar problems in the races.”

Remember that Checo is Mr. Tire Life. Maybe his McLaren isn't so good for that as his Sauber was.

I was thinking that initially myself but others have similar opinions of the tyre deg. I believe Hulkenberg has noticed it and the same with Seb and Rosberg.

Quote:

Nico Hulkenberg: "We got a lot done, but also had some issues today. I did quite a lot of running, but it was difficult because the tyres degraded quite quickly. In addition, it was not easy for us today to use the full potential of the tyres on a single quick lap. There is definitely room for improvement."

Quote:

Sebastian Vettel: "It's quite tough to keep the tyres alive for many laps."

at least the vettel-quote is blown out of proportion as he linked the tyre-deg to the low temps... if the temps are low and the track is green(ish), the cars slip around a lot more which generates heat at the tyre-surface... overheating is the end of an F1-tyre but the paradox thing is, that not getting the temps into the tyres will ultimately lead to an overheating surface as well - hence kill the tyre...

that's basically what vettel said, what kimi said and what pirelli predicted a week ago...

what pirelli changed for this season is:

- a wider working-window for the tyres- quicker compounds to aid the mechanical grip- different compounds for the race-weekends to hopefully give more strategy-options

the window and the speed of the compounds is very much on spot - so pirelli did an at least "OK"-job... the final verdict will see the number of different strategies taken by the top-10 drivers each gp taken into account... i'd love to see drivers on the harder compound in Q3, looking for a strategic advantage

_________________How to fix F1:1. Stop seeking consensuses on rules - it will always turn out to be the least favourible option for everyone involved...2. Listen to the fans - there are plenty of them and they have good ideas...